Tuesday, June 24, 2014

In 2005 and 2006 as I
negotiated the deal to remove the racing greyhounds from Juarez back to the US,
several people were assisting from beginning. Two of those people were Pat
& Alan Roberts. The owner of the track told me he would not release the
greyhounds to me after previously telling me he would. I looked him in the
eye, told him he was not an honorable man, turned my back to him and walked
out. At my side were Pat, Alan, and Noreen Reid and as we walked side by side
out of the building we expected at any moment to hear gun fire. Pat, Alan and
Noreen where very courageous in going with me that evening and then walking side by side with me after my negotiations
failed, fully knowing the track owner was very angry with me.

Thankfully in 2006 the
greyhounds of Juarez were returned to the US and adopted into forever homes.

Pat and Alan Roberts
never turned away from helping a greyhound. If you can find it in your heart if
you can join me again in walking side by side with Pat and Alan as it is
now these two individuals that need our help.

Click
here to support Alan Roberts LVAD Support Fund by Patricia Roberts

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

Remember how that word was tossed around by the “humane advocate protectors”
movement years ago?

Now imagine if the
“humane advocate protectors” came across a picture on social media of an
individual, in say the racing industry, doing something blatantly stupid with
an animal. They’d be posting condemnation, starting petitions and of course
asking for donations so that they could fund more fact finding vacations,
personal hobby excursions, salaries and other perks all in the name of keeping
animals safe.

Now why in the world are they remaining silent when one of their own did
something blatantly stupid? Allowing a rescued animal to sit on their lap
while driving and then taking a selfie to post on social media? What type
of message is this sending?

Certainly they are aware
that driving with a dog on your lap can lead to a distraction that may cause an
accident, injury or death.

Certainly they are aware
that using a cell phone camera while driving can lead to a distraction
that may cause an accident, injury or death.

While they abhor even
the mention of the term "dog crate", certainly they must be aware
that the safest place for a newly rescued dog would be in a crate in the back
seat so that if there were an accident, the dog would not be crushed by the
airbag while sitting in the lap of the driver.

Just how important would
that selfie have been then?

One thing I will give the industry credit for – when someone did something
stupid, the industry took care of it and often times the individual was banned
from the industry. Do the “humane advocate protectors” censure and remove their
own when found to have put an animal at risk? Or are they allowed to remain as
a voice of the “humane advocate protectors”? Where is the accountability,
transparency and for the safety of the dogs the “humane advocate protectors”
have personal contact with? Where is their animal safety and welfare training?
Why do they fail to find fault with themselves?

Imagine a world where those who abuse, mistreat animals - regardless if they
claim to be "humane advocate protectors" - would follow the
standards they demand of others.

Of course, the “humane
advocate protectors” will rally and cry that none of this is true. A "humane
advocate protector" was out doing good deeds and wanted to show the world.
A "humane advocate protector" would never do anything
stupid like drive with a dog on their lap or take a selfie while driving with a
dog on their lap. They will of course say the photo was staged.